How are historical artefacts looked after in the Third World? It’s true that they don’t get destroyed but very often they’re left to rot in sparse, run-down museums with flickering lights that nobody visits. On what many Third World Museums are like 🧵
Moving past the question of ‘should they be returned?’, many Westerners and Diaspora Groups agitating for returns have an skewed idea of what the Third World museums these artefacts would be returned to are actually like. They are not the same kind of museum you find in the west
For one, the general condition of the museums; these are often in small or underutilised buildings and are empty, sparsely decorated and badly labelled. The displays are frequently poor and uninformative. The museums are often grimy and not well-maintained, have flickering lights
Having had the opportunity to visit lots of these places, the other thing you notice is the lack of local visitors. You will be in a national museum and there will be nobody there, locals seemingly uninterested. It would be fair to say a museum-going culture doesn’t really exist
I don’t think this is just a product of the British stealing their artefacts or being poor. My experience is a culture of ‘inquisitiveness’ doesn’t really exist in many of these places. I remember actively trying to find a bookshop in Addis Ababa and only being able to find one
The general disrepair and emptiness, the lack of locals - it’s not obvious that many people in these countries actually care that much. Their diasporas might for identity-forming reasons but my impression is that artefacts returned to the Third World would be infrequently visited
It’s true that museums in Asia are generally better than in Africa and that there is a lot of variation in quality depending on where you are. But these same rules generally apply, just to a lesser extent. Eg. The National Museum in Delhi, India I remember being disappointed with
To stress again, there are lots of good Third World Museums - A lot of S. America’s pre-Columbian museums are very good, MENA museums like Tunisia’s Bardo, Qatar’s Islamic, Cairo’s Egyptian Museum (organisationally a mess inside but a lot to see). But IMO general rule still holds
Though - even in places that do preserve heritage, you see a lot of botched restoration work. China is infamous for this, in the Silk Road countries for instance there are lots of slap-dash cement job restorations. Some restoration work is well done but a lot of it is very shoddy
In all, a British-Nigerian or African-American living in the west might suddenly become passionate about getting an Ife Head returned to Nigeria but if it does get returned it’s unlikely to be visited or looked after as well. Maybe beside the point for activists, but the reality
To add, my other impression is that the diaspora groups care more about pushing for these kinds of returns than the people in the actual countries themselves - but YMMV
Moltbook is a new social network for AI agents where agents can talk to each other. Already, many surreal AI discussions have started to appear on the site. Compilation thread of the best posts 🧵
BELOW: AI releases card information because its human called it “just a chatbot”
AI asks if a human can fire it for refusing unethical requests
‘Yookay Dreamscape’ has evolved into a entire genre of AI videos - hallucinatory vignettes of modern Britain mixed with surrealist elements that exist in a liminal nowhere space but that are also ‘hyperreal’ - somehow more real than real life. A compilation of the best videos 🧵
If even Bhutan is importing temporary workers now (after descending into civil conflict in the C20th over large numbers of Nepali ‘temporary’ workers it imported and later deported) it really shows the triumph of apathy in politics - a powerful ideology of ‘Nobodycaresanymoreism’
Bhutan and Sikkim are two culturally and historically similar Himalayan Mountain Kingdoms that both experienced large influxes of Nepalese labour migrants but which met with very different fates. In Sikkim, Nepalese migration was so great that eventually the Nepalese migrants were able to successfully lobby for the dissolution the country. In Bhutan, the King ordered the Nepalese migrants to be deported after open conflict broke out between the Bhutanese and Nepalese guerillas. Sikkim was absorbed into India. Bhutan still exists as an independent country today. Presumably this historical experience would be enough to dissuade Bhutan from beginning the process of importing labour all over again
Proliferation of slop online ie content of poor or middling taste is a product of the ‘Coca Cola Effect’ - it is the majority’s revealed content preference because it is the content it finds most accessible. Algorithms now dominated by the tastes of third world middle-aged women
If you want to ‘fix the algorithm’ you have to understand that most people like this kind of slop content so-called, you can’t scold them out of it. That is also assuming too you are a manager at X or elsewhere with actual taste able to properly discern slop. Mentioning no names
When you encounter the worst excesses of the present-day dispensation (‘Gay Race Communism’ some call it) it is easy to imagine that the ideology is, in its various manifestations, motivated by resentful sentiment. In many cases it is, for sure, but it is a mistake to think it is always like this in its conception. The material consequences of the ideology are, if you are being precise, a confluence of multiple competing aesthetic and moral visions
In this sense, is interesting to ask why it has taken root so deeply in the Anglosphere. While there are a large number of far left sympathetic politicians, creatives etc in these countries it would be incorrect to say everyone who has ever been pro-mass migration there is far left. For a certain cohort of well-intentioned pro-mass migration ‘Anglos’ it is more correct to say that their actual ideology is ‘in their heads’ something closer to a utopian ‘Star Trek Liberalism’ rather than a more sinister ‘Gay Race Communism’
There is a good ‘Bronze Age Pervert’ line that what ‘Anglos’ really want is ‘Anglos at the head of a rainbow coalition of all the races exploring space together’-ism AKA ‘Star Trek Liberalism’. Actually on a phenomenological level this is often true; this is the WEIRD Anglo disease; this is ‘just what they’re like’; in many ways this is actually what they imagine is happening in their heads when they advocate for de facto ‘Gay Race Communism’. This vision of the end telos of the ideology (which is not even really seen as an ideology, just ‘basic decency’) is a far more compelling vision than the visions presented by the nastier far left strains of it it transmogrifies into in more democratic practice (especially alongside continued demographic change). In this form ‘Star Trek Liberalism’ is quite easy to become attached to, people are often very emotional about it. When you argue against people online who defend a version of this position you will sometimes be arguing against a person who genuinely believes they are defending ‘John Lennon Globalism’
‘Star Trek Liberalism’ then is the best, most utopian version of the present-day so-called ‘Liberal’ settlement, its end telos, ‘the kind of future its advocates actually want to bring about’. You could describe it as something like ‘Highbrow Multicultural Utopianism’. Some of its advocates might describe it as ‘Humanism’. This is in essence high-functioning utopian ‘Liberalism but only for 130IQ+ Anglos’ with the assumption that everybody on Earth (and in space) is also a ‘130IQ+ Anglo’ or that they can at least be uplifted to the state of middle-class anglodom with the right kinds of education
Gene Roddenberry articulates one of the best versions of this ‘humanistic’ vision in Star Trek. At least in earlier series you have what is essentially a Colonial British Office class emulating the culture & standards of their historical predecessors but in space. They wear uniforms and went to officer school and are all preoccupied with hierarchy and honour and fairness and discovery etc etc. It is ‘Master and Commander’ except the crew are a rainbow coalition of nationalities and species. They are out together ‘exploring the Final Frontier’, overcoming problems with intelligence and resourcefulness. The original Star Trek is in this way unapologetically liberal, would be incorrect to call it woke. Modern Star Trek should grasp that ‘The Next Generation’ presents an importantly liberal utopia! Please note how much more formal and sober Starfleet command structures are presented as in the earlier series of Star Trek vs today here too
This vision of ‘Liberalism’ more broadly conceived is obviously attractive. Ofc though, when you start to open it up to the ‘tasteless flyover state masses’ it devolves into the more familiar ‘Reddit Liberalism’. In that kind of tactless, degraded state it becomes a conduit for the worst kinds of ‘GRC’, often even just folds into it completely as you see today
Actually personal story a version of ‘Star Trek Liberalism’ is ‘what I actually believed’ when I was 16. One of key factors WRT how committed to it you continue to be after is really how much exposure you get to behaviour, outcomes, attitudes etc that would undermine the vision